The 2024–2025 period has been marked by a series of high-profile political violence incidents that have fundamentally altered the American landscape. For many observers, the sheer frequency and convenience of these events—specifically the July 2024 attempt on Donald Trump and the September 2025 assassination of Charlie Kirk—have fueled theories that these are not isolated acts of lone wolves, but rather calculated setups designed to manipulate the national narrative.
The assassination attempt on Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, was the catalyst for modern setup theories. Skeptics point to the catastrophic security failures—such as an unsecured rooftop 150 yards from the stage—as being too incompetent to be accidental. From a cynical political perspective, the imagery of a defiant, bloodied Trump became an immediate pillar of his campaign, leading some to argue the event was a controlled crisis meant to secure his electoral victory.
Similarly, the 2025 assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk in Utah followed a pattern that theorists claim is textbook. Following the event, political rhetoric shifted instantly toward the radicalization of the youth and the terrorist nature of the opposition. Critics argue that such events provide a Reichstag Fire moment—a pretext for the government to implement sweeping crackdowns on dissent or to pass restrictive legislation under the guise of public safety.
One of the strongest arguments for the setup theory is the frequent admission by the FBI or local police that suspects were already on their radar. In the case of Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin, Tyler Robinson, and countless other domestic terror suspects, it is often revealed that authorities had prior tips, social media warnings, or even direct interviews with the subjects before the crime occurred.
To the public, this suggests a management of threats rather than a neutral observation. The logic follows that if a suspect is known, their actions can be allowed to proceed to a certain point to fulfill a political or narrative goal. While law enforcement cites the high bar for pre-crime arrests and the protection of civil liberties, skeptics see it as a deliberate choice to let a situation go live for the sake of the resulting optics.
In a hyper-polarized environment, the gain from these tragedies is immense. Assassination attempts often lead to:
Surges in Fundraising: Both parties use the fear of violence to mobilize donor bases.
Narrative Control: Violent acts allow politicians to frame their opponents as dangerous or enemies of the state.
Diversion: Major scandals or economic failures are often buried by the 24/7 news cycle of a national tragedy.
The question of whether foreign entities like Israel have a hand in these events is often raised due to the concept of cui bono—"who benefits?" Proponents of this view argue that Israel benefits from a United States that is firmly aligned with its security interests. In the case of Charlie Kirk, who was a vocal (if occasionally complex) supporter of Israel, his death was used by some to highlight the dangers of anti-Israel radicalization in the West.
However, despite these claims, no empirical evidence has linked Israeli intelligence to these specific domestic US events. While the Mossad has a documented history of targeted killings in the Middle East, the risk of being caught interfering in the internal politics of its most vital ally would likely outweigh any perceived gain.